Over in rust, there are a set of style points that come up in almost every review of substance. I've found myself becoming more and more terse when raising those issues, which is ultimately a detriment to the people that are here looking for useful feedback.
I had the idea of adding some generally-accepted improvements, along with explanations and hopefully links to more official sources, to the tag wiki. These could be longer form, and answerers could link to them instead of re-explaining each time.
Rust also has some prominent tools that perform automatic formatting and linting. These tools tend to have documented rationale, and it would be great if people had the chance to know about them and run them. I figured I could add links to those as well.
When I went to edit the tag wiki, I found a bunch of introductory text that explains what Rust is. I think that at the point that someone is asking for a review of Rust code, they already know all that.
I found Would it make sense to copy (some) tag wikis from SO?, which seems to promote the process of copying tag wikis from Stack Overflow. Stack Overflow wikis are aimed at providing a high-level overview of the tag, but that doesn't seem useful here on Code Review. The top answer for 'Canonical' questions to help address common issues indicates that the tag wiki should be used as an entry point to frequent issues.
I believe there are two tightly-related aspects to this question:
- Should we put common style points relevant to a tag in the tag wiki?
- Should we remove/reduce aspects of the tag wiki that don't have to do specifically with code review?